Shapiro v. Ferrandina’s Empirical Analysis
478 F.2d 894 · 1973
Citation profile
106 federal appellate · 17 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 197 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Shapiro (1976), United States v. Toscanino (1974)
106 federal appellate · 17 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3184 · 18 U.S.C. § 3186 · 18 U.S.C. § 3190 · 18 U.S.C. § 3238 · 18 U.S.C. § 3282 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406
Relies on Pinkerton v. United States · Pauling v. McElroy · Turner v. Louisiana · Fernandez v. Phillips · Collins v. Loisel
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 197 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[a]s a matter of international law, the principle of specialty has been viewed as a privilege of the asylum state, designed to protect its dignity and interests, rather than a right accruing to the accused.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“The “principle of specialty,” long recognized in international law, provides that “the requisitioning state may not, without the permission of the asylum state, try or punish the fugitive for any crimes committed before the extradition except the crimes for which he was extradited.” Friedmann, Lissitzyn & Pugh, International Law 493 (1969); see generally 1 Moore, Extradition 194-259 (1891). In United States v. Rauscher, 119 U.S. 407 , 7 S.Ct. 234 , 30 L.Ed. 425 (1886) the Supreme Court established the rule of domestic law that the courts of this country will not try a defendant extradited from another country on the basis of a treaty obligation for a crime not listed in the treaty. While this determination might appear to be limited to circumstances indicating a possible evasion of the treaty, the principle has been extended to bar prosecution for crimes listed in the treaty but for which extradition, for whatever reason, was not granted. See Johnson v. Browne, 205 U.S. 309 , 27 S.Ct. 539 , 51 L.Ed. 816 (1907); Greene v. United States, 154 F. 401 , 407-408 (5 Cir. 1907); see generally 1 Moore, supra, at 245-256. 478 F.2d at 905 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) Extradition shall be granted only if the evidence be found sufficient, according to the laws of the place where the person sought shall be found, either to justify his committal for trial if the offense of which he is accused had been committed in its territory or to prove that he is the identical person convicted by the courts of the requesting state.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.